If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Websleuths News

Join Websleuths Radio for the final discussion of THE KILLING SEASON
with Josh Zemam, Rachel Mills and special guests including Bob Kolker author of Lost Girls

Family of teen killed in girlfriend's bedroom wants girl charged

"Police say Johran McCormick, 17, was fatally shot last month in the early morning hours of March 13."

"His family reportedly said they were told by authorities the girl denied she knew him and that may have sparked the deadly confrontation. The two reportedly had been dating."

"A group of McCormick’s family and friends met Wednesday in front of the Spring, Texas, home to call for the girl to be charged, claiming that the shooting would have not occurred had she told her father the truth at the time."

"They called on the girl to be charged with accessory to murder or involuntary manslaughter, the KHOU.com report said."

"The girl’s father told investigators that he heard noises coming from her bedroom and he went in to investigate."

"The father reportedly told investigators that he and McCormick got into an argument and the teen lowered his hands as if he was grabbing for a gun. That was when the father allegedly told deputies he fired the gun. He is not expected to be charged."

“I wished the father could have asked more questions, he could have picked up the phone,” Shawn Curley, McCormick’s father, told The Houston Chronicle."

Family of teen killed in girlfriend's bedroom wants girl charged

The girl was clearly terrified of her father,. She did a foolish thing on the spur of the moment but she did not cause him to shoot the boy. The father chose to shoot the boy. I think he did it out of anger, not because he thought the boy was armed. He is an adult and he is responsible for what he did. We don't even know if she really denied knowing him or if the dad made it up to cover his butt. She might have gone along with the story to protect her dad from being charged with murder. MOO

The victim was allowed into the house by someone who lived there. There was no good reason for him to be shot and killed. I agree with his parents. Someone needs to be charged in his death.

The parents aren't saying "someone needs to be charged'. They're saying she needs to be charged, so by agreeing with the parents you agree that she should be charged. She did what any teenager would do ...deny. If she's guilty then so is the young man.

The parents aren't saying "someone needs to be charged'. They're saying she needs to be charged, so by agreeing with the parents you agree that she should be charged. She did what any teenager would do ...deny. If she's guilty then so is the young man.

The young man's dead. She's alive. She lied about letting him in the house. IMO, he was murdered and someone needs to be charged whether that person is the dad or the daughter or, better yet, both of them.

Her actions clearly contributed, but not everyone who contributed to a death is legally responsible. For her to even have a tiny chance of being charged, they'd have to show her dad had told her he'd shoot anyone in her room - otherwise, it just isn't an expectation one can be held responsible for not having.

If this boy had been white I would bet good money that he'd still be alive right now. This boy was let into the house by someone who lived there and I'd be willing to bet that the daughter was TERRIFIED of the father. You would be too if your father was willing to point a gun at someone in your room (And, if I'm not mistaken, it wasn't like he was in there alone. He was with her, was he not?)

I think the family knows that the charges have been dropped against the father and won't be picked back up, so they're going after the daughter because sometimes second best is better than nothing when it comes to justice and a grieving family.

If this boy had been white I would bet good money that he'd still be alive right now. This boy was let into the house by someone who lived there and I'd be willing to bet that the daughter was TERRIFIED of the father. You would be too if your father was willing to point a gun at someone in your room (And, if I'm not mistaken, it wasn't like he was in there alone. He was with her, was he not?)

I think the family knows that the charges have been dropped against the father and won't be picked back up, so they're going after the daughter because sometimes second best is better than nothing when it comes to justice and a grieving family.

If this boy had been white I would bet good money that he'd still be alive right now. This boy was let into the house by someone who lived there and I'd be willing to bet that the daughter was TERRIFIED of the father. You would be too if your father was willing to point a gun at someone in your room (And, if I'm not mistaken, it wasn't like he was in there alone. He was with her, was he not?)

I think the family knows that the charges have been dropped against the father and won't be picked back up, so they're going after the daughter because sometimes second best is better than nothing when it comes to justice and a grieving family.

It doesn't matter that he was let in by someone who lives there. He knew in the early morning, and it isn't clear what time that was, he knew he shouldn't be there. It's as much on him as it is on her. If I find a man in my daughter's bedroom at 2am, he just may get shot and I don't care what color he is. Why bring race into this? To exonerate the dead guy? To make the dad out as a racist? Was her or the father's race mentioned? He has the right to protect his household, which is why he wasn't charged. Do you have any proof that he wasn't protecting his family and himself? Other than conjecture which is of course not proof of anything.
It doesn't state her age , but he was 17. She was underage. He may have been in the right place but it was the wrong time, and he knew that, they both did. [B]She will not be charged. Nor should she be IMO.

The young man's dead. She's alive. She lied about letting him in the house. IMO, he was murdered and someone needs to be charged whether that person is the dad or the daughter or, better yet, both of them.

So, you're backing away from your original stance that she should be charged, and now you just want somebody to be charged?

If this boy had been white I would bet good money that he'd still be alive right now. This boy was let into the house by someone who lived there and I'd be willing to bet that the daughter was TERRIFIED of the father. You would be too if your father was willing to point a gun at someone in your room (And, if I'm not mistaken, it wasn't like he was in there alone. He was with her, was he not?)

I think the family knows that the charges have been dropped against the father and won't be picked back up, so they're going after the daughter because sometimes second best is better than nothing when it comes to justice and a grieving family.

One of the things that really influences cases like these is the fact that trespassing was historically grounds to kill someone. It may seem a bit much now, but think of how spread out parts of the U.S. were/are. We didn't have an organized police system for a while, and the country was so new and unsettled. And if some people lost private property, they lost everything, without social welfare systems. So historically, in a lot of places and particularly here, it was considered perfectly acceptable to kill someone who trespassed on your property. The corollary to that was that people knew they risked death if they tried.

Now, people get mad about self-defense laws, but they were designed to allow you to shoot trespassers without having to have a debate about if the trespasser really deserved it. It's a tough line to draw - you need people to be able to protect themselves, but society doesn't expect most people to get shot for trespassing, and so you want to take the trespasser's intent into account. As the victim here was not an immediate threat, the legally wise thing to do was call police. But we recognize that other issues come into play and people aren't thinking of the legally wise thing to do in the situation. So legally he probably is justified. Morally is a whole different question, and I think it's impossible to ignore the issue of race in such situations. I think that many people would call the police were the victim white, but shoot if the victim were black - sometimes without even realizing they were making a racial judgment, based on their own misplaced fears. At the same time, many people would shoot the victim regardless. I'm not sure who has the moral high ground there.

ETA: I now realize that the victim's father was black - which explains why I hadn't realized there was a racial element to this case until now. That doesn't mean race can't play a part, but obviously it somewhat changes the perspective. I maintain that a lot of people would make judgments based on race when deciding whether to kill a home intruder, though, even subconsciously. It is a factor to be considered in self-defense laws.

The girl's father is also black. The father thought his daughter was being sexually assaulted, I doubt the boys race entered into the shooting at all.

It didn't enter into it. It was introduced by those who want to blame the father as though race was the reason. At worst, he may be guilty of manslaughter.
But we weren't there. The young man owns what happened to him as much as anyone else involved IMO. You can't tell me that being in an under aged young
woman's bedroom, in the early hours of the morning, isn't risky, regardless that she let him in.